91–100 of 234 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ethereum layer 1 is processing closer to 20 per second. In particular, it did 1716000 in the last 24 h. Ethereum's layer 2 can handle tens of thousands transactions per second. These are then settled on chain as a single transaction. There are multiple layer 2 solutions already working and more are coming. It's not a pipedream anymore they are live.
"already working" hmm.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Meanwhile, crypto indexers beat Bitcoin maximalists. But, the evidence for indexing performance will never see the light of day . :)
>But, the evidence for indexing performance will never see the light of day . :) Why not? If such evidence exists why aren't you presenting it?
You can go to pandaanalytics.com if you'd like, and play with their index options. See what strategies have worked well. (I weight by market cap, top-10, no stablecoins)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Meanwhile, crypto indexers beat Bitcoin maximalists. But, the evidence for indexing performance will never see the light of day . :)
Not sure what you mean by crypto indexer, you mean people who buy a basket of crypto? Sure, in the short term, they might outperform BTC, over long term 70% will die, 90+% won't recover to their ATHs. If you indexed back in 2017 into top 10 coins, only like 3 of them crossed their old prices from 2017, rest are as good as dead.
I’m still not quite following why people are looking at bitcoin for this. Surely one of the newer generation like eth is better suited? Or better yet a layer 2 on eth
Here is the real world, Bitcoin is currently running a blazing 3.3 transactions per second. Etherium dwarfs that at a mighty 14 transactions per second. Meanwhile, PayPal crawls along with a pathetic 488 tps. https://www.statista.com/statistics/730838/number-of-daily-c... https://www.businessofapps.com/data/paypal-statistics/
How many transactions happen in the world?
its a pity bitcoin devs are so opposed to changing the protocol. So much research has been done showing the feasibility of increasing bitcoins throughput. Xthinner for instance is capable of compressing bitcoin blocks by up to 99% using bloom filters [1]. Much of this research was conducted on the bitcoin fork, bitcoin cash, by people ostracized from the bitcoin community for wanting to explore these ideas. [1] https…
The lower transaction throuput,the higher the fees, the higher the incentive for the miners to process transactions. They probably don't want to mess with that dynamic too harshly.
Bitcoin dominance is fading this year only because it has bet on LN with fundamental inbound capacity problem. LN rejected my proposal to solve it and extend channels with credit lines: XLN https://medium.com/fairlayer/xln-extended-lightning-network-...
Payment channels ARE credit, generally - I'm sorry this proposal was rejected. Was there a reason for the rejection?
Rejection reason: unclear, doesn't fit the narrative.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? It has been in development for 7 years. Why use this complicated hack solution when anyone can just use a different cryptocurrency and not have these problems in the first place?
> It has been in development for 7 years. Good. They need to get it right. > Why use this complicated hack solution It’s complicated but not a hack at all. It makes perfect sense. > when anyone can just use a different cryptocurrency and not have these problems in the first place? There are 0 (zero) cryptocurrencies that scale better than Bitcoin that don’t also compromise on security or decentralization. Lightning i…
That being said, I don’t know enough about the security aspect - so your claim may end up being correct!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? It has been in development for 7 years. Why use this complicated hack solution when anyone can just use a different cryptocurrency and not have these problems in the first place?
> It has been in development for 7 years. Good. They need to get it right. > Why use this complicated hack solution It’s complicated but not a hack at all. It makes perfect sense. > when anyone can just use a different cryptocurrency and not have these problems in the first place? There are 0 (zero) cryptocurrencies that scale better than Bitcoin that don’t also compromise on security or decentralization. Lightning i…
The only way what you are saying makes sense is if you decide to for some reason define security as "bitcoin's hashing and has rate".
No one is doing any sort of mining attacks on bitcoin cash, monero or ethereum.
Like the "lightning network" the only way to pretend it is necessary is to pretend it solves a made up problem.
Bitcoin dominance is fading this year only because it has bet on LN with fundamental inbound capacity problem. LN rejected my proposal to solve it and extend channels with credit lines: XLN https://medium.com/fairlayer/xln-extended-lightning-network-...
Interesting. > Also, uninsured balances are enforceable onchain, which is very different from a trusted balance. Does this mean XLN is implemented with a smart contract that withdraws the money from an address if you fail to pay? Or automatically cancels the channel if you withdraw more than what you have in the channel?
https://github.com/homakov/xlncontracts/blob/main/contracts/...
it is withdrawn from a special intermediary "reserve" balance OR a Debt is created on this identity.